Main | DLC Democrats Reaping the Consequences>>

Main | Massachussets, please hire some PR people>>

Main | TDS - A Necessary Dialogue on Race>>

Main | Who Needs New Ideas, Anyway?>>

Main | Who's anti-American now?>>

Main | John Bolton>>

Main | Krauthamer admits there's a civil war in Iraq>>

Main | The Republicans' 2006 agenda: ABD (Anybody But the...>>

Main | NY Times on a conservative split>>

Main | Molly Ivins on D.C. Dems>>

Sunday, April 09, 2006 | 12:57 PM

Posted by

What will it take to remove this President-select from office? Is it possible to remove this tyrant? I am beginning to think that due to his excessive arrogance he feels smug enough to say "I dare you" whenever impeachment comes up because he knows he has the Republican and Democratic congressional support to keep him in office. This is the big difference between George W. Bush and Richard Nixon. In Nixon's case at least you had a significant number of Republicans who were willing to impeach Nixon if they were shown concrete evidence of wrong doing. This gave the average U.S. citizen confidence in government. Today's Republican party is staunchly behind Bush and even attempts to protect him, even though there is blatant widespread evidence of wrongdoing. The Democratic party of the Nixon era was aggressive and determined to get to the bottom of the issue. The majority of today's Democrats, especially the DLC are so afraid of being called "unpatriotic" and so concerned about Republican sensibilities that they have become Bush's silent partners. They also find themselves more concerned about what the pharmaceutical, banking and insurance companies that have contributed to their campaigns than they are about the concerns of their constituents. This selected commander in cheif continues to embarrass himself and the country with thoughtless statements like "Bring 'Em On" taunting Al Qaeda and the Iraqis knowing full well that he, ( nor any member of his family has to do the fighting), lying to the American people about the reasons for the war in Iraq, the Downing Street Memo, the total ineptitude of Katrina, the attempted dismantling of Social Security, the disappearance of millions of dollars in Iraq, the cronyism of no bid contracts to Halliburton and other Bush administration allies, the outing of a C.I.A. operative because her husband just happened to tell the truth about Saddam Huessein's uranium deal with Niger, which was that there was NO deal made between Heussein and Niger, unprecedented tax breaks for the rich, spying on US citizens, exporting prisoners to other countries to be tortured, the denial of US involvement in the overthrow of the elected leader of Haiti and the attempted overthrow of the elected leader of Venezuela, not providing sufficient armor for our soldiers in Iraq while at the same time cutting their benefits. We now know that this and possible future adminstrations have no intention of leaving Iraq because of the massive construction that is taking place. The new embassy is going to be the largest in the world. It will be more like a fort than an embassy. There are also gigantic shopping malls with Burger Kings, Wal-Marts and car dealerships under construction now. These things wouldn't be happening if our government had intentions of letting the Iraqis rule themselves. As if all that wasn't enough today we find out that there is indisputable proof that the documents of the alleged uranium deal were forged. In spite of all this reckless abandonment of basic principles George W. Bush still has a smile on his face, a smile that says I can do anything I want to do and there's nothing you can do about it. It could be because that shadow government that we've heard so much about actually does exist and it doesn't matter what the people think because it has all it really needs to control the people. They are fully prepared for mass incarceration if there is widespread physical resistance to Bush policies. We often hear the words "freedom" and "liberty" from Mr. Bush and it is no accident. These are the words patriotic Americans love to hear and he knows it. But the painful truth is when you hear these words from this president he means just the opposite. This administration has no intention whatsoever of leaving Iraq and it is my belief that the next administration has no intention of leaving either, regardless of which party occupies the White House. A candidate like Russ Feingold would best for the country. If he were elected I believe he would send the troops home, but what are the chances of his being elected. The high-ranking officials within the Democratic Party brainstrust torpedoed the candidacy of Paul Hackett in Ohio and I am certain that they would do the same to Feingold, should he be the choice of the grassroot Democrat. Feingold is finding it almost impossible to get a simple censure of Bush, let alone impeachment. He is finding the brunt of the opposition coming from his fellow Democrats. So what will it take to remove this lawless may take a national upheaval that hasn't been seen in this country since the 1860s.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home